an analysis of the european union’s conflict...

AN ANALYSIS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION’S CONFLICT RESOLUTION

INTERVENTION IN POST-CONFLICT CROATIA AND THE FORMER

YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

By

ATHINA GIANNAKI

Submitted Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences

in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts

Sabanci University June 2007

iii




By

ATHINA GIANNAKI

Submitted Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences

in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts

Sabanci University June 2007

iv

To my family and Andreas

v

© Athina G. Giannaki 2007

All Rights Reserved

vi

ABSTRACT




Athina Giannaki

M.A. in Conflict Analysis and Resolution

Supervisor: Dr. Nimet Beriker

Croatia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) are two countries which have been established after the disintegration of Yugoslavia, in 1991. Shortly after its independence and till 1995 Croatia faced a bloody civil war, between the government and the Serbian minority of the country. FYROM avoided a full scaled war, but it faced a destructive crisis in 2001 between the government and the Albanian minority. The crisis, however, was managed quickly, especially with the help of the international community.

This thesis examines the type of European Union’s (EU) intervention, as a third

party, in the post-conflict environment of the two countries. A short comparison of the two cases indicates the commonalities and differences between them. The data used in this thesis were mainly gathered from various European Union’s official documents.

vii

The results of the thesis suggest that for both cases the EU’s intervention was primarily a structural intervention.

Key words: EU, Croatia, FYROM, third party, structural intervention

viii

ÖZET

UYUŞMAZLIK SONRASI HIRVATİSTAN VE ESKİ YUGOSLAV MAKEDONYA

CUMHURİYETİ’DEKİ AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ

UYUŞMAZLIK ÇÖZÜMÜ MÜDAHALELERİNİN ANALİZİ

Athina Giannaki

Uyuşmazlık Analizi ve Çözümü Yüksek Lisans, Sanatta Yeterlilik Tezi

Tez Danışmanı: Doç. Dr. Nimet Beriker

Avrupa Birliği, bölgesel bir örgüt olarak, son birkaç on yılda uyuşmazlık önleme ve barış inşası konularında tüm dünyada üçüncü taraf olarak etkin bir katılım sergilemektedir. Ancak AB, Avrupa kıtasında daha da aktiftir ve bu tezin incelediği iki vaka sözkonusu kıtayı kapsamaktadır.

Hırvatistan ve Eski Yugoslav Makedonya Cumhuriyeti (EYMC), 1991’de

Yugoslavya’nın dağılması sonrasında oluşmuş iki ülkedir. Hırvatistan, bağımsızlığını kazanmasının hemen akabinde başlayıp 1995 yılına kadar süren ve hükümetle ülkedeki Sırp azınlık arasında gerçekleşen, kanlı bir iç savaş yaşamıştır. EYMC ise, 2001’de tam anlamıyla bir savaşa mani olunmuşsa da, hükümet ve Arnavut azınlık arasında yıkıcı bir krizle yüzleşmiştir. Ancak bu kriz, özellikle de uluslararası toplumun yardımıyla hızlı bir şekilde yönetilmiştir.

Bu tez Avrupa Birliği (AB)’nin, üçüncü taraf olarak, her iki ülkedeki uyuşmazlık

sonrası ortama müdahalesinin türünü incelemektedir. İki vakanın kısa bir karşılaştırması

ix

aralarındaki benzerlik ve farklara dikkat çekmektedir. Tezde kullanılan bilgiler temel olarak çeşitli resmi Avrupa Birliği dökümanlarından toplanmıştır.

Tezin sonuçları, her iki vaka için de AB’nin müdahalesinin özde bir yapısal

müdahale şeklinde olduğu göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler: AB, Hırvatistan, EYMC, üçüncü taraf, yapısal müdahale

x

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Nimet Beriker, for all the

help she provided me during the year. Her contribution for the completion of this work

has been enormous, and for that I am grateful to her. I would also like to thank my

professors, Dr. Ayse Betul Celik and Dr. Benjamin Broome, who both were in my

committee, for their valuable comments, especially during the last stages of the research.

Lastly, I would like to thank Dr. Bratislav Pantelic for the essential remarks he provided

me with, especially for the historical background chapter.

Moreover, I would like to express my gratitude to certain people, who have been

on my side during the research and writing process. Among them I would like to thank

Thomai Iasonidou, Thanasis Gatsias and Konstantia Samara, for their support and

insights made this journey bearable and meaningful. Their friendship is very valuable for

me.

I especially want to thank Andreas Kotelis whose companionship during the

process of writing this thesis has been one of the most important variables that

contributed to its realization.

Last, but not least, I want to thank my parents and my brother, for their moral and

financial support during the last two years of my studies.

xi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVRIATIONS Chapter One. Introduction .......................................................................................................................1

Chapter Two. Literature Review ..............................................................................................................4

Literature Review .....................................................................................................................................4

Methodology...........................................................................................................................................20

Chapter Three. The European Union......................................................................................................24

Chapter Four. Historical Background.....................................................................................................46

Croatia ....................................................................................................................................................54

The conflict between Croats and Serbs.........................................................................................54

Conflict Resolution attempts by the international community......................................................57

Croatia’s current situation.............................................................................................................59

The Former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia........................................................................................62

The conflict between Slav Macedonians and Macedonian Albanians ..........................................62

Conflict Resolution attempts by the international community......................................................65

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonian’s current situation .............................................68

Cases’ comparison..................................................................................................................................69

Chapter Five. European Union’s third party intervention in the post-conflict Croatia and the former

Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia ..........................................................................................................72

Croatia ....................................................................................................................................................72

The former Yugoslav Republic of Maedonia .........................................................................................82

Chapter Six. Analyses ............................................................................................................................94

Croatia ....................................................................................................................................................94

The former Yugoslav Republic of Maedonia .........................................................................................99

Chapter Seven. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................106

References ............................................................................................................................................118

xii

List of tables Table 1....................................................................................................................................................18

Table 2....................................................................................................................................................59

Table 3....................................................................................................................................................68

Table 4....................................................................................................................................................71

Table 5..................................................................................................................................................104

Table 6..................................................................................................................................................104

xiii

ABBREVRIATIONS

CFSP

CIVCOM

CR

CSPs

EAR

EC

ECHO

ENP

ESS

EU

EUMC

EUMM

EUMS

EUSRs

FYROM

ICG

NGO

PPU

PSC

RRM

SAP

SG/HR

Common Foreign and Security Policy

Committee for Civilian Aspects of Crisis

Management

Conflict Resolution

Country Strategy Papers

European Agency for Reconstruction

European Community

European Humanitarian Aid Office

European Neighbourhood Policy

European Security Strategy

European Union

European Union Military Committee

European Union Monitoring Mission

European Union Military Staff

European Union’s Special

Representatives

Former Yugoslav Republic of

Macedonia

International Crisis Group

Non-Governmental Organizations

Policy Planning and early warning Unit

Political and Security Committee

Rapid Reaction Mechanism

Stabilisation and Association Process

Secretary General/High Representative

of the CFSP

2

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Since the end of the Cold War, many international and regional organizations have

been actively involved with conflict prevention, conflict management and post-conflict

peacebuilding. Among them, the European Union (EU), as one of the most powerful

regional organizations in the world, has shown an increased interest in conflict resolution,

especially towards countries of the European continent. Two of these cases, where the

EU became involved as a third party, are examined in this thesis.

One of the events which characterize the end of the 20th century is the dissolution of

Yugoslavia. Prolonged wars, thousands of victims, millions of refugees followed the

dissolution, which the EU failed to prevent. In the aftermath of the wars, when the new

states were struggling to find their own position in Europe, the EU had a second chance

to intervene and undertake a leading role in the reconstruction of the countries. Their

development became a major goal of the EU, in its attempt to bring stability and peace in

its region.

In that phase, the post-conflict period, part of the third party’s role is to prevent a

renewed conflict. The settlement of a conflict does not imply the impossibility of re-

escalation, if root causes are not addressed. Any new conflict in the area would have been

a major threat to EU’s solidity, due to the geographical position of those countries.

3

Furthermore, at that time, the EU’s aspirations to be a global actor who can act

effectively in the conflict resolution field had grown significantly.

These aspirations are clearly evident in the various changes in the EU’s policies and

instruments of conflict resolution. The EU was actually moving towards the creation of a

more concrete framework, regarding its foreign policy and its role as an international

actor and conflict prevention and transformation, became one of the Union’s principal

objectives. This growing commitment to conflict resolution, both regionally and

internationally, in addition to the EU’s wish to diminish any possibility for renewed

conflicts in the Balkans, explains EU’s intervention as a third party to the area.

This thesis examines two cases of the Balkans; Croatia and the Former Yugoslav

Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). Through this comparative research, my aim is to

explore a little examined area, that of the EU conflict resolution mechanisms in the post-

conflict environment of its periphery. I will present and analyze all EU activities and the

instruments used in those two countries to prevent future conflict escalation and

transform the root causes of the conflicts, leading to conflict resolution.

One of the most powerful tools of conflict resolution for the EU, which is used

widely the last years, is the power of membership. Its power lies in the leverage it gives

to the EU to ask for certain consensus from the potential members, in return for the

economic and political help the EU provides. However, it is not the only tool of conflict

resolution used by the EU in the case of post-conflict Croatia and the FYROM. A number

of other instruments are also used, unrelated to the prospect of membership.

The thesis consists of seven chapters. The first chapter is the introduction, were I

present the scope and objective of the thesis and I explain the value of this study.

The second chapter consists of two parts. The first part is devoted to the literature

review. As the study is concerned with the intervention of the EU, as a third party, in the

two cases under examination, it is important that the thesis will start by examining the

4

various third party instruments of intervention, as presented in the conflict resolution

literature. The second part deals with the methodological issues. Hence, I will elaborate

on the scope and objective of the thesis and the methodology used for addressing the

issue.

Before continue with the presentation and analysis of the data, it is important to

clarify the structure of the EU. Therefore, in the third chapter I present the various

institutions through which the EU implements its conflict resolution policies.

A brief historical background of the conflicts, the conflict resolution procedure

which was followed, current situation of the two countries and their relationship with the

EU is given in the fourth chapter.

The presentation of the instruments used by the EU for intervening in the post

conflict environment of Croatia and FYROM is given in the fifth chapter. The first part of

this chapter will be devoted in Croatia and the second in FYROM.

In the next chapter, these instruments are analyzed and categorized according to a

framework, adopted from the conflict resolution literature.

The final chapter, the conclusions, provides an overview of the thesis and further

theoretical and empirical implications are discussed.

5

CHAPTER 2

2.1. LITERATURE REVIEW

Third parties according to Young (as cited in Mitchell 1988:48) are actors which

become significantly involved in a conflict without total identification with either of the

parties. Sandole (in Cheldelin, et al. 2003:49) argues that a third party intervention is an

“attempt to facilitate processes leading to quite different, albeit potentially interrelated

outcomes”. More concrete, the third party can prevent the conflict from erupting, control

it from spreading, settle it or even deal with the underlying causes of it. Having achieved

this the third party may also decide to work on the long-term relationships among the

parties. Since the third party intervention is crucial in the conflict resolution (CR) field,

the literature on this subject is inevitably huge. This body of work concerns issues, such

as who can be a third party, when shall the third party intervene, what kind of action it

shall take, when is it successful, etc.

Third party can be an individual, a non-governmental organization (NGO), a

regional or an international organization or even a state. The conflict resolution field

distinguishes between Track I and Track II actors. While Track I refers to

governmental/international government organizations, Track II refers to local, national

and international conflict resolution NGOs and other non-governmental actors (Sandole

in Cheldelin et. all, 2003:51).

6

As Crocker points out (in Crocker et al. 1996:189) individual governments,

regional peacekeeping or peace enforcement efforts and the United Nations (UN) are

usually engaged in military interventions. A similarly broad range of governmental,

intergovernmental and other, such as NGOs, media, specialized civil society and conflict

resolution groups, humanitarian relief and development organization, etc, players may

intervene in nonmilitary ways (overt, covert, economic, diplomatic, public or private) to

manage and resolve conflict.

The conflict resolution literature presents a plethora of third party activities,

organized under different categories and sub-categories. For instance, based on the

conflict stage: preventive intervention during unstable peace, crisis management during a

crisis, conflict management in case of a war, peace enforcement, peacekeeping and

peacebuilding after an agreement is reached and conflict de-escalates (Lund, 1996:386).

However, even under each of these categories third parties can undertake a variety of

actions. This thesis presents four major categories of third party intervention, conflict

prevention, mediation, track II diplomacy, and peacekeeping/peacebuilding, each of

which encompasses many activities, as presented in the following part.

2.1.1. CONFLICT PREVENTION

The prevention of violent conflicts has become especially important in the last

decades, especially after the genocide in Rwanda, the dissolution and the wars which

followed in the former Yugoslavia, and other cases. Furthermore, the number of actors

involved in conflict prevention is constantly growing. States, international and regional

organizations, international, regional and local non governmental organizations have

developed various mechanisms in order to be effective in conflict prevention.

Many scholars have addressed the issue of conflict prevention and they have

come up with their definitions. Most definitions share some similarities; the differences

7

however are notable and crucial. Conflict prevention is general defined by the specialists

as any action which prevent the arise of conflicts, the conflict escalation into violence and

the re-emergence of violence (Wallensteen:1998, Lund:2002, Boutros-Ghali:1992,

Stewart, Carnegie Commission on the Prevention of Deadly Conflict:1999, Ryan:1998,

Bedjaoui:2000). A common characteristic of these definitions is that they include actions

taken in all stages of a conflict.

Another group of scholars portrays the different stages of the conflict and the

appropriate actions that can be undertaken. For instance, Ackermann (2000:19) proposes

that conflict prevention measures should not just aim to prevent violence, but also to be

initiated in the post conflict phase. For that, she defines conflict prevention in a pre-

violent stage as preventive diplomacy, and at a post-conflict stage as post-conflict peace-

building. Another definition of conflict prevention, based on the time used, is given by

Reychler (2001). He distinguishes proactive violence prevention, as any effort which

prevents conflicts from crossing the threshold of violence, from reactive violence

prevention, the aim of which is to prevent a further escalation of the conflict by

controlling the intensity of the violence, by reducing the duration of the conflict, and by

containing or preventing geographical spillover (p.4).

Even though most of the scholars agree that a mixture of different measures is

necessary in order for conflict prevention to be more effective, there is no unanimity as

for the exact measures. Moller et al. (2005) divide the conflict prevention measures into

peaceful and coercive measures. The first category includes actions, such as verbal

attention, relief efforts, facilitation, third party coordination, proposals and decisions. On

the other hand carrots, sticks, threats to use coercive measures, as defined in chapter VII

of the United Nation’s (UN) Chapter, and decisions to carry out such threats are the

coercive measures of the typology (p.6). Jentleson (2003) also finds the combination of

coercive and non-coercive measures as the basis of successful conflict prevention. A

more detailed tool box of conflict prevention is offered by Lund (2002:101). It includes

diplomacy, interactive conflict resolution, economic development, education, health,

agriculture, and so on, as well as commercial activities.

8

Ackermann, who distinguishes, as seen above, conflict prevention measures

depending on the conflict stage, offers concrete conflict prevention actions. Preventive

diplomacy includes a variety of measures, such as monitoring systems, preventive

peacekeeping forces, creation of communication channels among the parties, economic

assistance, problem-solving workshops, etc. The post-conflict peacebuilding can be

achieved through rapprochement, reconciliation and institution building. For her, conflict

prevention should be more focused not on how to prevent, but to the in depth analysis of

the causes and the dynamics of the conflicts.

Cockell (in Hampson and Malone, 2002:192) differentiates three components of

preventing diplomacy: early warning, key decisions on early actions and strategies of

actions. Boutros-Ghali (1992) identifies four strategies for conflict prevention: preventive

diplomacy, peacemaking, peace-keeping, and peace-building. For Bercovitch (1996)

conflict prevention policies fall under three categories: early warning systems,

confidence-building measures, and mediation and related diplomatic missions. In a recent

study Bercovitch et. al proposes that preventive deployment, facilitation, third party

mediation, and fact finding missions are the instruments of conflict prevention. (2005)

Ryan argues that the time of conflict prevention distinguishes two types of peacekeeping;

preventive and “traditional”. The former tries to stop destructive conflicts from occurring,

while the latter responds after destructive violence is underway.

The literature refers to two categories of conflict prevention. The direct,

operational or light prevention and the structural, root causes or deep prevention

(Wallensteen & Möller: 1998, Peck: 1998, Aggestam in Carey, Richmon: 2003,

Jentleson, 2000: 10, Miall, Ramsbotham, Woodhouse: 1999). The first refers to measures

to address immediate crises (e.g. sending high-level diplomatic missions to mediate

between parties, using economic tools such as sanctions, inducements, or collecting

weapons and demobilizing fighting units), and employing forceful measures such as

deploying peacekeepers to a region. The former address root causes such as poverty,

political repression and uneven distribution of resources, which can, if left unattended,

9

escalate into violence. This is a long-term approach which aims to promote development,

good governance, reduce poverty, promote human rights, etc.

Another trait that the literature focuses on is the conflict prevention actors.

Wallensteen (in Hamson and Malone, 2002: 214) pays special attention to the fact that

these actions are taken by third parties, not by the primary parties themselves. Carment &

Schnabel (2003:11) talk about a variety of actors. Ackermann (2000) in her conflict

prevention framework, identifies four levels of prevention, top leadership, leaders of

ethnic groups and political movements, international/regional organizations, NGOs and

other grassroots organizations, together with approaches/actions they can undertake.

The report of the Aspen Institute conference (1996) highlights that even though

public opinion identifies conflict prevention with military intervention, preventive action

must occur on several levels. The primary responsibility for conflict prevention lies with

the government and civil society of the country. Nevertheless, external assistance is often

needed. For that the second level of responsibility is the international community:

regional/international organizations, and other states. Finally, the role of NGOs is

increasingly recognized as of highly importance in conflict prevention.

2.1.2. MEDIATION

In case a conflict was not prevented from erupting, the third party can use a

variety of methods in order to contribute to the resolution of it. Mediation is one of the

most commonly used techniques. The field, however, lacks of a general accepted

definition of mediation. Many definitions have been proposed, each of which focuses on

a different aspect. Some are outcome-oriented, arguing that mediation helps the parties

achieve a settlement of their dispute (Young, 1967:34, Mitchell, 1981:287, Blake and

Mouton, 1985:15). Other focuses on the neutrality and impartiality of the mediator

10

(Bingham, 1985:5, Moore, 1986:14, Spencer and Yang, 1993: 1495). Bercovitch

(1996:13), after having examined various issues related to the mediation process, such as

mediators’ interests, mediators’ characteristics, dispute environment, etc, offers the

following definition of mediation: “a reactive process of conflict management whereby

parties seek the assistance of, or accept an offer of help from, an individual, group, or

organization to change their behavior, settle their conflict, or resolve their problem

without resorting to physical force or invoking the authority of the law”.

Two paradigms of mediation are described by Crocker et al. (1999:20-24): the

structuralist and the social-psychological paradigm. The first “is based on the belief that

through the use of persuasion, incentives and disincentives, parties can be led to and

through a negotiated settlement”. Crucial in this paradigm is the notion of “ripeness” and

the idea that often mediators have to use their leverage or power. The former “focuses on

the processes of communication and exchange as a way to change perceptions and

attitudes”. Dialogue and problem-solving workshops are central in this paradigm. The

authors propose a synthesis of these paradigms, in which the mediators’ activities depend

on the stage of the conflict (p.33).

Mediator’s behavior can be also seen as a spectrum (Bercovitch&Houston,

1996:29). “At the low end of the spectrum are communication-facilitation strategies

where a mediator takes a fairly passive role….In the second set a mediator exercises

more formal control over situational aspects or the process of mediation…In the most

active range of mediator behavior, the mediator affects the content and substance as well

as the process of mediation”.

In the same logic, Fisher and Keashly (as cited in Fisher, 1997) have developed

the contingency model. According to that, third party interventions consist of the

following: conciliation, consultation, pure mediation, power mediation, arbitration and

peacekeeping. Furthermore, a conflict can pass from four stages of increasing intensity:

discussion, polarization, segregation, and destruction. For each of these phases a different

type of third party intervention is needed (pp.164-167).

11

Similarly, Paffenholz (2001) has developed an even more detailed paradigm of

different types of mediation. A mediator can offer: good offices (low-intervention

mediation efforts); facilitation (occurs prior or parallel to the negotiations, when

facilitators try to bring conflicting parties together); consultation (mediator acts like

advisor to the conflicting parties); negotiation (a type of mediation, when a third party is

involved and both sides are present. A negotiator tries to bring the different views of the

conflicting parties together and helps them to formulate an agreement); mediation:1

(mainly on the level of states; is more interfering than other types of mediation, because

mediators give their own opinions of the process and usually try to develop their own

plan for resolving a conflict); power mediation (states that are able to bring resources

(financial “carrots” or military “sticks”) into the negotiations can practice this approach.

This outcome oriented approach aims to identify the leaders of the conflicting parties and

bring them together to negotiate or mediate a cease-fire and a peace accord); and non-

official mediation (practiced by many different types of actors, from academics to

international or local NGOs and non-organized individuals. This approach is long-term

and relationship-oriented, because it aims at re-building destroyed relationships between

the conflicting parties) (pp.76-78).

The literature refers very often to the importance of the right timing, which is

implied in the above mentioned models. Zartman has introduced the concept of the

ripeness, according to which a conflict is ripe for resolution when a mutual hurting

stalemate exists, when parties’ efforts for solution are blocked and when power relations

among the parties has changed (Kleiboer, 1996: 363). The ripe time for Crocker et al.

(2003:152) encompasses three distinct dimensions. Operational and political readiness;

strategic and diplomatic readiness; and being the right mediator with the appropriate

relationships.

The effectiveness of mediation is a very disputable issue of the literature. For

Susskind and Babbit (1992) mediation is effective when “it results in one or more of the

1 Mediation is used as a general term throughout from Paffenholz. When it appears in italics, it refers to a special form of mediation used within the mediation range.

12

following: the cessation of violence; agreements that allow each party to save face; good

precedents in the eyes of the world community; arrangements that will insure

implementation of the agreement; and better relationships among the disputing parties”

(p.31).

Mediation’s effectiveness depends on some conditions. For some scholars it

depends of parties’ need and motivation for solution and from mediator’s sources,

leverage and skills (Touval, 1992:233, Rubin, 1992:251) Susskind and Babbit develop

further the preconditions of an effective mediation: 1) Disputants must realize that they

are unlikely to get what they want through unilateral action. 2) The alternative to

agreement must involve unacceptable economic or political cost. 3) The representatives

of the parties must have sufficient authority to speak for their members and to commit to

a course of action. 4) Other international or regional interests with a stake in the dispute

must exert pressure for resolution. 5) A mediator must be available who is acceptable to

all sides (Susskind, Babbit, 1992: 31-35).

2.1.3. TRACK II DIPLOMACY

For many scholars (Fisher: 1999, Azar: 1990, Burton: 1990) destructive and

protracted conflicts, which are based in deep-rooted inter-group cleavages, should be

addressed with Track II diplomacy, which means interactive conflict resolution or

problem-solving workshops. John Burton is the pioneer of the interactive conflict

resolution. In the ’60s he and his colleagues used this approach to the conflict between

Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore, as well as to the Cyprus conflict. Leonard Doob was

also among those who developed this new approach. Herbert Kelman and Edward Azar

in building upon the work of Burton and Doob and offered a good deal in the field.

Finally, this part would not be completed without a reference to the contributions of

Christopher Mitchell and Ronald Fisher.

13

The term track two diplomacy is attributed to Joseph Montville. He defines it as

“unofficial, informal interaction between adversary groups or nations which aims to

develop strategies, influence public opinion, and organize human and material resources

in ways that might help resolve their conflict” (1987:7). Furthermore, he talks about three

processes encompassed in track two diplomacy: problem-solving workshops, the

influence of public opinion and cooperative economic development.

Kelman defines interactive problem solving as “an academic-base, unofficial third

party approach, bringing together representatives of parties in conflict for direct

communication. The third party facilitates the process, without proposing solutions. The

aim of the workshops is to promote a special type of communication, with a very specific

purpose: to generate input into the political process and transform the relationship

between the conflicting parties” (1992: 64-65). Workshops are combined with various

other activities, including contacting and interviewing decision makers and policy

advisors, training third-party panel members and developing detailed policy analyses of

the conflict (1997:247).

Ronald Fisher developed his own framework, which he named interactive conflict

resolution (1993). Even though he agrees with Kelman on the third-party and the

workshop method, he draws our attention to the participants, which should be unofficial

and influential representatives of their groups. What is more, he proposes an initial model

of the transfer process that allows for differential effects on the various constituencies

(leadership, public-political, governmental-bureaucratic) in the home communities

(1997). Finally, Broome (1997) focuses on the importance of the “interactive

management” workshop, in which “relational empathy” is required in order for the

parties to construct common views of the conflict and move towards its resolution.

The fact that the third party devotes its attention to the interest of all the parties, in

contrast to any traditional third party intervention, in a given dispute, is of major

importance for Mitchell & Banks (1996: 5). The activities of Track II diplomacy are

varied, according to Diamond & McDonald (1996: 39). They include problem solving

14

workshops, involvement as mediators or consultants to ongoing peace making processes,

private one-on-one diplomacy, conferences, seminars training and education events,

dialogue group, networking, confidence building, institution building, and acting as

messengers or go-betweeners.

The importance of Track II diplomacy has been highlighted by many scholars

from a variety of points of views. The fact that these initiatives offer to the participants an

environment suitable for fruitful discussion where exploratory talks about the underlying

needs and interests of the two sides can take place, has be pointed out by Azar (2002).

For other scholars the importance of Track II lies in the help it can offer during the pre-

negotiation phase (Zartman: 1989, Fisher: 1989, Wallensteen: 2002). Finally, Track II

gives participants the ability to discuss very sensitive or taboo issues, which are difficult

to be discussed during the official negotiations, free from fears that any party might be

embarrassed in the process (Runald, 2002: 84-96). Fisher argues that subjective aspects

of conflict, such as miscommunication, misperceptions and hostile attitudes, must be

addressed in order to move toward true resolution or transformation of the conflict and

this change can be achieved only with face-to-face interaction between representatives (in

Davies&Kaufman, 2002:61). International and national conflicts can be de-escalated and

resolved if Track Two diplomacy is further developed and implemented, according to

McDonald (1991:202).

2.1.4. PEACEBUILDING, PEACEKEEPING

Peacebuilding is usually defined as an attempt to build a new social environment

of sustainable peace (Reychler, 2001: 12, Jeong, 2000: 38, Reilly, 2003:175). For

Tschirgi (2003:1) peacebuilding is more than just post-conflict reconstruction. “It

encompasses peace and development agendas in support for conflict prevention, conflict

management and post-conflict reconstruction”. Ball (in Crocker et al. 2001:722)

15

identifies two stages of peacebuilding. The first stage, the transition, aims to establish a

government with sufficient degree of legitimacy to operate effectively and to implement

key reforms mandated by the peace accords, while societal reconciliation is promoted.

During the second phase, the consolidation, all these economic and social reforms, as

well as the reconciliation process are further promoted.

Peacekeeping on the other hand is defined as the use of military operations in to

order to implement a peace agreement (McLean, 1996:321, Evans in Hampson,

1993:542). Jeong (2000:129-131) offers a broader definition of the scope of

peacekeeping. For him the main function of contemporary peacekeeping is to assist in

rebuilding political, administrative, economic and other infrastructure. Hampson

(1996:542) offers a variety of peacekeeping activities, such as confidence-building

measures, food distribution, providing transportation, restoring basic government

services, monitoring cease-fire agreements, demobilization and disarmament.

Peacebuilding and peacekeeping, however, are not totally unrelated. The United

Nations Security Council identifies a connection between them and recognizes the value

of including peacebuilding elements in the mandates of peacekeeping operations, while at

the same time accepts that peacekeeping can be the beginning of the peacebuilding

process (Kapungu: 2001). In addition, Jeong (in Cheldelin et al, 2003:291) indicates that

the short-term goal of peacebuilding, to manage and prevent renewed violence, can be

achieved with the help of peacekeeping forces.

One of the most prominent names in the peacebuilding field is Lederach. He has

come up with a comprehensive framework of peace-building. Firstly, he identifies three

levels of actors in peace-building, which can be shown as a pyramid. The top-level

leadership represents the smallest people. This is followed by middle-range leadership,

while the base of this pyramid represents the grassroots, the largest leadership. Secondly

he presents the different approaches to peace-building of each level. Level one

approaches focus on high level negotiations, led by highly visible, single mediator.

Second level approaches include problem-solving workshops and training in conflict

16

resolution, led by insider, partial teams. Finally, the third level approaches aim to

establish local peace commissions to end the fighting and then offer grassroots’ training,

prejudice reduction and psychological work in post-war trauma (1995: 145-155).

In the literature the interrelation of post-conflict peace building and conflict

prevention is strongly highlighted. Schnabel (2002) argues that peace building is

sustainable only when it includes conflict prevention principles and he calls the

preventive involvement in a post-conflict environment as second generation prevention,

in contrast to pre-conflict prevention. Moreover, for Heong “preventing a return to

violent confrontations through transforming relationships is an integral part of building a

new communal structure acceptable to former adversaries” (p.22). Reconciliation and

reconstruction of community relations are vital parts of the peace building process.

For de Graaf Bierbruwer and van Tongeren (in van Tongeren, et. all, 2002)

effective peace-building and prevention of violent conflicts requires a framework. The

structure they propose is consisted of three pillars; 1) building the community, 2) creating

the capacity for conflict prevention and peace-building and 3) operational activities. The

1st pillar refers to these activities which increase the awareness and the support of the

public. The 2nd is about these activities which build up the capacity for conflict

prevention and peace-building. Finally, the 3rd pillar’s goal is to stimulate and support the

people who want to prevent the escalation of violence and to transform conflict as well as

potential conflict into durable peace (pp.94-96).

For Hawk (2002:127) peacebuilding mission should focus on (re) building a state

along three dimensions: “(1) it must be capable of exercising authority over its territory

and providing security to its citizens, (2) it must be effective at resolving conflicts

through its institutions and promoting the general welfare of its citizens, and (3) it must

provide a political identity based on accepted legitimacy”.

The last decades a new trait in the peacebuilding area has been developed.

Humanitarian or relief and development aid is being widely used and for that the

17

literature has started addressing this issue. The fact that this aid is usually distributed

through NGOs, made Stein (in Stern, Druckman, 2000:388) talk about “privatization of

humanitarian aid”. Anderson (2001, 258-264) urges those involved in the aid distribution

to “do no harm”. She points out that humanitarian and development aid can even

exacerbate, reinforce or prolong a conflict by feeding into worsening inter-group dividers

or by ignoring and undermining inter-group connectors. Reychler takes that even further

and puts the relief aid under a package of foreign policy measures. She argues that in

order to be able to promote peace, aid should be accompanied with long-term conflict

prevention and peace supporting processes (2001: 240).

Since this thesis focuses on the post-conflict stage it is important to identify some

characteristics of this stage as they come from the literature. It can be argued that third

parties are expected to help not only for the cessation of violence, but also to promote

positive peace (Galtung, 1990), thus removal of structural and cultural violence and

promotion of long term reconciliation. In order to achieve that third parties should target

both security issues, political stability, and economic development, but also

reconciliation, as a process of “harmonizing of divergent stories; acquiescence in a given

situation; and the restoration of friendly relations” (Pankhurst in Miall et. al, 1999:209).

Or, as Moshe argues (2001), post-conflict peacebuilding on the one hand should promote

relationships and institutions that strengthen human development and growth, and on the

other hand the necessary structure to govern and protect.

Dan Smith (2002) argues that post-conflict reconstruction has four traits: security,

political stability, economic development, and reconciliation. “Security is needed against

the resurgence of fighting; the political framework has to provide for democracy, human

rights and the rule of law; economic reconstruction has to start with short-term needs

while laying the foundations for long-term prosperity; reconciliation and trust building

help former enemies regard each other merely as political opponents where disagreement

is deep disputes are sharp, but each other trust the other to play by the rules” (p.446).

18

Junne & Verkoren offer a more detail strategy for post-conflict reconstruction,

which at the same time operates as a conflict prevention framework. Address of security

issues, such as disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration of former combatants;

rebuilding of state institutions and democratization; development of local institutions;

restoration or creation of rule of law; rebuilding infrastructure; media’s role; educational

reforms; reorganization of the health system; environmental concerns; and economic

reforms are, according to the authors, the issues which should be tackled in a post-

conflict society, in order to prevent a re-emerged conflict and move towards

development.

So far, the focus has been on the actions that a third party can undertake mainly

with regard to the conflict stage or the conflict characteristics. Another type of

categorization of all third party instruments for intervention, based not on the time of

intervention, but aim of intervention, is suggested by Beriker (2007). Thus, actions

aiming to “transform dysfunctional relationship among the conflicting parties with the

aim of creating common intellectual and value space among the parties” are part of the

transformative intervention category. Facilitative mediation, interactive conflict

resolution, conflict-resolution training and post-conflict reconstruction are these kinds of

activities. As seen from the above literature review, these activities are part of the

mediation or track II diplomacy.

The second type of intervention, the structural intervention, aims to “change the

incentive structure of the disputing parties with an expectation that they would lead the

parties to change their conflict behavior”. Positive incentives, peace-building, peace-

keeping, initiating bilateral cooperative programs, negative incentives, power mediation

and military intervention are included in this category (Beriker, 2007:25-26). This

category includes a variety of instruments, which usually in the literature can be found

under the conflict prevention, mediation and peacebuilding/peacekeeping categories. The

following table presents in detail this framework, which I adopt for this thesis.

19

THIRD PARTY ROLES

A. Transformative intervention: “Actor intervenes in order to transform dysfunctional relationship among the conflicting

parties, with the aim of creating common intellectual

and value space among the parties”. A1-Facilitative mediation: Actor mediates with the aim of helping parties find their own solutions. It can be in the forms of facilitating exchange of information and problem-solving processes, and achieved by introducing new resources to the conflict system, and enhancing trust among the parties. A2-Interactive conflict resolution: State indirectly sponsors or helps to organize unofficial third-party assisted, small group problem-solving initiatives in order to solve their differences in informal confidential settings. A3-Conflict-resolution training: It is a skill-building exercise conducted by the third- parties with the aim of preparing participants to be more effective in dealing their differences. A4- Post-conflict reconstruction: Actor initiates or supports social rehabilitation efforts in the conflict-torn nation.

B. Structural intervention: “Actor intervenes as a third-party, and carries out activities which are designed to change the incentive

structure of the disputing parties with an expectation

that they would lead the to change their conflict behavior”. B1-Positive Incentives: Actor as a third party offers financial and/or political rewards to the disputing party with the aim of changing its conflict behavior. B2-Peacebuilding, peacekeeping: Helping the parties to build and develop democratic institutions such as, electoral systems, financial reforms, and constitution writing with the belief that democratic processes will eliminate the structural causes of the conflict. Sending peace forces to contain the dispute. B3-Initiating bilateral cooperative programs: Actor helps the parties to foster their bilateral cooperative programs mostly in law-politics areas, such as culture, business, education and sports. B4-Negative Incentives: Actor withdraws economic and/or political rewards from the conflicting parties, or from one of the parties, with the expectation to change the parties’ behavior, and the course of the conflict. B5-Power mediation: Third parties impose a solution on a conflict in order to enhance their national or institutional interests. Pressing the conflicting parties to reach an agreement through the use of force or competitive tactics. B6-Military intervention: Actor military intervenes to stop or change the course of an already existing conflict.

Table 1, Beriker 2007:25-26

20

It should be noted that the framework is part of a bigger one, which incorporates

the conflict resolution field with peace, security, and diplomatic studies in an attempt to

present a tool-box for foreign policy actions for international actors. However, for the

purpose of this research only the part of the framework which refers to third party’s

intervention is used.

The importance of this framework is that “it articulates foreign policy behavior of

states with the analytical tools that the conflict resolution field and the peace studies

tradition offer” (21). The international relations field offers a tremendous amount of

theories regarding international conflicts and suggests tools to the parties, namely states

and institutions, to execute their foreign policy and prevent or settle a conflict. Regardless

the vast amount of research, most of the times there is no distinction between the acts of a

state which has a partisan role and a state which acts as a third party. On the other hand,

CR and peace studies field address the issue of the third party intervention in a

conflicting situation, without, however, integrating it into practical instruments of foreign

policy.

Due to the fact that the EU is an international actor, which has operations all over

the world, any decision for intervening in a conflicting situation is a foreign policy

decision for it. It is, however, important to examine this policy from a CR perspective,

thus by using the third-party intervention literature. Few studies from the CR field

address the EU’s roles, as a third party, as foreign policy tools (Eralp&Beriker:2005,

Celik&Rumeleli:2006). This study aims to be a valuable input in the literature.

21

2.2 METHODOLOGY

2.2.1. RESEARCH QUESTION

The question addressed in this thesis is: “What conflict resolution instruments did

the EU used in the post-conflict Croatia and FYROM and what type of intervention is

that”? The objective of this study is to give an analytical and in detailed description of all

the activities that EU engaged in and all the mechanisms it used in the post-conflict

environment of those two countries. More specifically, 1995-2006 in Croatia’s case and

2001-2006 for FYROM. Furthermore, I will analyze them, according to Beriker’s

framework, a partial framework as explained in the previous part, that I use and compare

the intervention between the two cases.

The fact that the last decades the EU is more active in conflict prevention and

peacebuilding, it has created many institutions to deal with these issues and has adopted

new policies which show its commitment to conflict resolution triggered my interest. I

believe that since the EU wants to improve its conflict resolution capabilities, it needs

research which analyze that. Furthermore, the conflict resolution filed also needs to

address this issue and provide the EU with the relevant theoretical background in order

for the organization to become more effective.

22

2.2.2. RESEARCH DESIGN

The primary focus of the thesis is to examine a little understood issue or

phenomenon, to develop preliminary ideas and move toward refined research questions

by focusing on the “what” question (Newman, 2006:33). Yin (2003:5) agrees that “what”

questions can be either exploratory or about prevalence (when surveys or archival

analysis is favored). Since the goal here is to develop pertinent hypotheses and

propositions for further inquiry, this is an exploratory research. Concerning its time

dimension, it is a case study, and more specifically, a multiple-case study, in which a set

of features will be in depth examine during a period of time (Newman, 2006:40).

According to Yin (2003) the scope of a case study research is to investigate a

contemporary phenomenon, when the researcher has limited control over behavioral

events

Furthermore, since my question focuses on an in depth examination of two cases

over duration of time, my work is a comparative case study. I consider this method as the

most appropriate because it will make my research more compelling and will give a more

general picture of the phenomenon under examination (Herriott, Firestone as cited in Yin,

2003:46). Cases should be selected in such a manner so that they either predict similar

results or produce contrary results, but for predictable reasons (Yin, 2003:47).

Furthermore, the universe from which the cases are to be selected should be well defined

such that the cases to be compared come from the same class or universe of cases

(Druckman, 2005:211).

The cases I chose to analyze are Croatia and FYROM; thus my research falls

under the first category. Both countries emerged after the 1991 dissolution of the

Republic of Yugoslavia, which held together different ethnic groups; both faced wars

between the government-majority of the population and minority populations. Croatia

experienced a long war, 1992-1995, between Croatians and Serbs. Today Serbs are the

10% of Croatia’s population. In FYROM’s case, no full scale and long-lasting war

occurred, but, nevertheless a bloody and destructive conflict emerged, between the

23

government and the Albanians, who today consist the 35% of the population. Both

countries are candidates for EU membership: Croatia since 2004 and FYROM since

2005, however, the EU has opened the accession negotiations with Croatia, but not yet

with FYROM.

This thesis examines the EU’s intervention in the post-conflict environment of the

two cases, which is 1995-2006 for Croatia and 2001-2006 for FYROM, as mentioned

previously. There are, however, some clarifications that need to be done regarding these

periods. In 2001 both countries were included in the Stabilization and Association

Process (SAP), a program designed for the Western Balkans in order to prepare them for

future integration into the EU. That means that from that point both countries are

potential members and the EU helps them in order to meet the relevant criteria and join

the EU. For FYROM, its post-conflict period coincidences with a pre-accession period,

as defined by the SAP, while for Croatia its post-conflict period could be separated into

1995-2001 period, and 2001-2006 which is both a post-conflict and a pre-accession

period.

Even though for the EU the help that both countries receive through that program

is part of their pre-accession assistance, in this thesis we treat that help as a mechanism

for third party intervention. Regardless, however, the nature of the SAP the EU at the

same time uses a variety of other tools to intervene in the countries. As will be seen from

the presentation and analysis of the data, there is a plethora of EU’s intervention actions,

which are not related to the SAP.

2.2.3. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A case study’s strength is its ability to deal with a full variety of evidence, such as

documents, artifacts, interviews, and observations (Yin, 2003:9, Hamel, Dufour,

24

1993:41). For this thesis the primary data I collected came from different sources: official

documents and reports from various EU institutions; news reports; from NGOs and from

EU official web-pages. The data are presented in the 5th chapter, based on their source

and chronologically.

In the 6th chapter each instrument used by the EU for intervening in the post-

conflict environment of Croatia and FYROM, presented in the 5th chapter, will be

evaluated according to the framework adopted for this thesis. As a result, at the

conclusion of the chapter it will be clear which instruments did the EU use and in which

degree.

The following chapter presents the structure of the EU, which is important in

order to have a good sense of the various institutions, organs, committees, and offices,

which comprise the EU’s make up. Furthermore, it would be impossible to present the

various EU activities, which come from different institutions, and understand their

relationship, without introducing firstly the EU.

25

CHAPTER 3

THE EUROPEAN UNION

The EU is neither a state nor an international organization. It is, however, a global

economic actor, with state features and responsibilities (Farell, 454). With the Treaty of

the EU, Maastricht Treaty (1991), the EU has a three pillar structure. The 1st pillar

represents the old European Community (EC) and it’s mainly concerned with the

common market, common agricultural, social, industrial policy, as well as with the

management of relations with third countries. The 2nd pillar is devoted to the Common

Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), which will be analyzed later in this chapter. Finally,

the 3rd pillar is related to justice and home affairs.

The three major EU institutions are the European Council, the European

Commission and the European Parliament. Each of them consists of many other units

while there are some more EU institutions and bodies, such as the European Central

Bank, the Court of Justice, etc. It is beyond the scope of this paper to present in detail the

whole EU structure. What is important for this thesis is to present those institutions which

are related to conflict resolution and/or to the Western Balkans. The presentation will be

based on the three main EU institutions: the European Commission, the Council and the

Parliament.

26

3.1. EUROPEAN COMMISSION

The European Commission is the executive institution of the EU, which proposes and

implements the EU legislation. Furthermore, it monitors the implementation of the EU

Treaties. It consists of 27 Commissioners, one of each member state. It implements its

external relations through five Directorates-General: external relations, trade,

enlargement, development and humanitarian aid. The European Commission has a broad

set of tools for long and short term prevention, which are presented below.

1. DG External Relations (DG RELEX):

The DG RELEX “contributes to the formulation of an effective and coherent external

relations policy for the European Union, so as to enable the EU to assert its identity on

the international scene”.2 It works closely with other Directorates-General, mainly

EuropeAid, DGs Development and Trade and ECHO. Furthermore, it is responsible for

the European Neighbourhood Policy (an EU policy towards its neighbours aiming to

build an environment of common values) and manages EU’s relations with other

countries all over the world. Under this DG a number of specialized units and policies,

related to conflict resolution, have been created. These are the following:

1.1. Conflict Prevention and Civilian Crisis Management

Conflict prevention is one of the main areas of work of the DG RELEX. The

means of the prevention of conflicts for the EU are various: development co-operation

and external assistance, trade policy instruments, social and environmental policies,

2

Web pages citations hereafter will be referenced in numerical order at the foot of the page. European Union, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/external_relations/general/mission_en.htm (13/02/2007)

27

diplomatic instruments and political dialogue, co-operation with international partners

and NGOs, as well as the new instruments in the field of crisis management. 3

The main framework under which the DG works for the prevention of conflicts

was adopted in 2001 and it is called EU Programme for the Prevention of Violent

Conflicts (Göteborg Programme). The Programme highlights the importance of early

warning and increased cooperation in international level in order to address violent

conflicts in the most effective way. Based on this framework the EU has developed a

number of policies and instruments for the prevention of conflicts, described below.

The EU draws even more attention to conflict prevention by referring to the

conflict cycle. It defines the various measures it can undertake for conflict prevention

both in situations where the country seems stable but there are sources of potential

conflict and in tense situations as well as in open conflict situations or in post-conflict

situations, where it offers civilian and military crisis management and post-conflict

stabilisation, as well as long term reconstruction and development.4

1.2. Country Strategy Papers (CSPs)

With these papers the EU systematically checks the risk factors, based on the

conflict indicators that the EU has developed. Briefly, these indicators are: legitimacy of

the state, rule of law, respect for fundamental rights, civil society and media, relations

between communities and dispute-solving mechanisms, sound economic management,

social and regional inequalities and geopolitical situation.5 After the analysis of a

situation the EU uses the Conflict Prevention Guidelines, in order to decide how to

intervene to a conflict, what instruments to use and where to target.

3

European Union, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/cfsp/cpcm/cm.htm (13/04/2007) 4 European Union, European Commission. Available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/world/peace/geographical_themes/conflict/conflict_cycle/index_en.htm (13/04/2007) 5 European Union, European Commission. Available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/cfsp/cpcm/cp/list.htm (13/04/2007)

28

1.3. Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)

Established by the Maastricht Treaty in 1993, the CFSP’s objectives are defined as

following:

• safeguard the common values, fundamental interests, independence and integrity

of the Union in conformity with the principle of the United Nations Charter ;

• strengthen the security of the Union in all ways;

• preserve peace and strengthen international security, in accordance with the

principles of the United Nations Charter, as well as the principle of the Helsinki

Final Act and the objectives of the Paris Charter , including those on external

borders

• promote international co-operation;

• develop and consolidate democracy and the rule of law, and respect for human

rights and fundamental freedoms.6

The Commission has a broad contribution to the CFSP, however, its work is

implemented by other EU institutions, such as the European Council and the European

parliament.

1.4. Conflict Prevention Partnership

Just a year ago, the EU in cooperation with four NGOs, established the Conflict

Prevention Partnership, which aims to improve the European Union's conflict prevention,

crisis management and peacebuilding capacities.7

6 European Union, European Commission. Available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/cfsp/intro/index.htm (13/04/2007) 7

Conflict prevention partnership. Available at: http://www.conflictprevention.net/ (13/042007)

29

1.5. Rapid Reaction Mechanism (RRM)

The RRM allows the EU to act quickly for the needs of countries under the risk of

a conflict or suffering from a natural disaster. The RRM can be deployed in cases of a

“crisis or emerging crisis, situations posing a threat to law and order, the security and

safety of individuals, situations threatening to escalate into armed conflict or to

destabilise the country”. It does not include humanitarian help and it is not geographically

restricted. It can be deployed during different stages of a conflict; for the prevention of it,

for crisis management and in a post-conflict environment.8

The RRM does not act just on order to provide humanitarian aid, as ECHO. It

aims to maintain and rebuild social structures necessary for political, social and economic

stability. Thus, the EU through the RRM pursued specific political goals. The first two

years of its function, 2001-2003, there have been 22 cases of deployment around the

world (Rummel, 2004:17).

1.6. European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP)

Through the ENP, created in 2004, the EU offers its neighbours “a privileged

relationship, building upon a mutual commitment to common values (democracy and

human rights, rule of law, good governance, market economy principles and sustainable

development)”.9 It applies in the following countries: Algeria, Armenia,

Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egypt, Georgia, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Moldova, Morocco,

the Palestinian Authority, Syria, Tunisia, and Ukraine. In order for those countries to

meet the objectives of the policy, the EU provides them with financial and technical

assistance. The ENP is closely related to the European Security Strategy and works

closely with the High Representative for the CFSP and the Special Representatives,

8 European Union. European Commission. Available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/cfsp/cpcm/rrm/index.htm (13/042007) 9 European Union, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/world/enp/policy_en.htm

(13/04/2007)

30

described in following parts of this chapter. By tackling issues of governance, lack of

development, etc. the ENP is an indirect EU tool of conflict prevention. It should be

highlighted that the ENP does not offer EU membership. If any of the countries covered

by the ENP applies for membership in the future this procedure would be totally

different, unrelated to the ENP. For the EU agreements with third countries is very

common, even countries with no clear immediate membership potential, which cover

political relations, development and co-operation assistance, trade, research, and cultural

co-operation. These agreements are part of the conflict prevention and crisis management

strategy of the EU.

1.7. Cross-cutting issues

The Commission participates in many international activities, such as the

Kimberley Process, which aims to eliminate the diamond conflicts and the Ottawa Treaty,

against landmines.

1.8. Non-proliferation and disarmament10

The EU has a firm position against the weapons of mass destruction and

participates in many multilateral treaties and conventions to ban or to minimize the

recourse to and development of them.

1.9. Sanctions and restrictive measures

Sanctions are “an instrument of a diplomatic or economic nature which seeks to

bring about a change in activities or policies such as violations of international law or

10

European Union, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/cfsp/npd/index.htm (25/04/2007)

31

human rights, or policies that do not respect the rule of law or democratic principles.

Restrictive measures imposed by the EU may target governments of third countries, or

non-state entities and individuals (such as terrorist groups and terrorists). They may

comprise arms embargoes, other specific or general trade restrictions (import and export

bans), financial restrictions, restrictions on admission (visa or travel bans), or other

measures, as appropriate”.11 Sanctions are part of the EU conflict prevention and crisis

management policy and EU’s main experience in that field is the case of the Federal

Republic of Yugoslavia, 1998-2000.

1.10. Human Rights and Democratisation Policy

The EU has not just been built upon the principles of democracy, liberty, respect

for the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms, but has also made these

principles necessary precondition for every potential new member. The “Copenhagen

criteria”, the criteria that every country has to fulfil in order to become an EU member, is

probably the best proof of the importance of the human rights for the EU. The

instruments that the EU uses in order to promote human rights and democratisation are

many.

EU election assistance and observation; the EU human rights forum, through

which EU cooperates with NGOs for the strengthening of the civil society; the European

Master Degree in Human Rights and Democratisation; the active role in the UN

Commission on human rights; support to the International Criminal Court and other

criminal tribunals. Furthermore, it advocates for the abolition of the death penalty and

fight against human trafficking. It promotes the prevention of torture and emphasizes the

importance of the rehabilitation of victims; it promotes the rights of the child; it protects

11

European Union, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/cfsp/sanctions/index.htm (25/04/2007)

32

and promotes the rights of the minorities; as well as the rights of indigenous people and

people with disabilities.12

2. DG Enlargement

For the EU, enlargement is regarded as a very powerful tool to transform countries

into well-functioning democracies. Since the establishment of the European Economic

Community, in 1957, 5 enlargements have taken place, the largest of which was the 2004

enlargement, when 10 countries joined the EU (the accession of Romania and Bulgaria in

2007 is regarded as part of the 2004 5th enlargement).13 On October 3rd, 2005 the EU

opened the accession negotiations with Croatia and Turkey. FYROM has also the status

of the candidate country, without, however, having started the accession negotiations.

FYROM’s and Croatia’s accession history will be presented in detail in the historical

chapter of this thesis. All the rest countries of the Western Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and

Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Serbia including Kosovo) are potential candidate

countries.

Every country which respects the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human

rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law can apply for EU membership.

Accession, however, can only follow if the country fulfils the Copenhagen criteria, which

were set up in 1993. Especially for the Western Balkans the EU has established the

Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP), as the framework which will lead them to

the EU. “The SAP is based on a progressive partnership, in which the EU offers a

mixture of trade concessions ( Autonomous Trade Measures), economic and financial

assistance (CARDS Programme) and contractual relationships ( Stabilisation and

12

European Union, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/human_rights/intro/index.htm (25/04/2007) 13

European Union, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/enlargement_process/index_en.htm (25/04/2007)

33

Association Agreements) in order to help the countries transit to a market economy,

promote regional cooperation and the prospect of EU accession”14.

2.1. European Agency for Reconstruction

The European Agency for Reconstruction is the organization which manages the

EU’s assistance to the Republic of Serbia (including Kosovo), the Republic of

Montenegro and FYROM. Established in 2000, the agency is governed by the Council

and the European Parliament and overseen by a Governing Board composed of

representatives from the 25 EU Member States and the European Commission.15 The

European Commission funded projects, which the agency implements, are designed to

help the countries come closer to the EU, by facilitating the development of the market

economy, strengthening the rule of law, and promoting institution building.

3. DG Development

The DG Development defines its mission as following: “help to reduce and

ultimately to eradicate poverty in the developing countries through the promotion of

sustainable development, democracy, peace and security”.16 Among other intervention

areas, special concern is given to human rights, democracy and conflict prevention in

close cooperation with the DG RELEX. It manages EU’s relations with the 71 ACP

(African, Caribbean and Pacific) countries and the 20 Overseas Countries and Territories.

A typical conflict prevention or management response mechanism of the GD is the

14

European Union, European Commission. Available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/enlargement_process/accession_process/how_does_a_country_join_the_eu/sap/index_en.htm (25/04/2007) 15

European Agency for Reconstruction. Available at: http://www.ear.eu.int/agency/agency.htm (25/04/2007) 16


http://ec.europa.eu/development/About/Mission_en.cfm (25/04/2007)

34

suspension of aid to counties ruled by autocratic regimes and not fulfilling the political

dimension of the development and cooperation agreements.17

4. DG European Aid-Cooperation Office

The European Aid (or EuropeAid) is an implementing organization for both the

DG RELEX and DG Development. More concretely, the European Commission’s

external aid, managed by the two DG mentioned above, is given through EuropeAid. This

EU external assistance is delivered in seven main areas: water, food, health, education,

prosperity, freedom and security in order to fulfill essential needs of human life. 18

5. DG European Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO)

ECHO is the world’s biggest contributor in humanitarian aid. The European

Union’s mandate to ECHO is “to provide emergency assistance and relief to the victims

of natural disasters or armed conflict outside the European Union. The aid is intended to

go directly to those in distress, irrespective of race, religion or political convictions”.19

6. DG Trade

The Directorate General for Trade promotes prosperity, solidarity and security in

Europe and around the world based on EU’s trade policy.20 The connection of this DG to

17

“EU crisis response capability revisited”, Crisis Group Europe Report N.160, 2005, available in http://www.crisisgroup.org/library/documents/europe/160_eu_crisis_response_capability_revisited_edit.pdf Accessed at April 20th, 2007 18

European Union, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/promotion/sectors/sectorslist_en.htm (20/04/2007) 19

European Union, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/presentation/mandate_en.htm (20/04/2007) 20

European Union, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/whatwedo/work/index_en.htm (20/04/2007)

35

conflict resolution emerges form the promotion of European values, such as democracy,

rule of law, through trade agreements.

7. European Commission Delegations

118 Delegations exist in third countries and 5 at centers of international organizations

which:

• Present, explain and implement EU policy;

• Analyze and report on the policies and developments of the countries to which

they are accredited ;

• Conduct negotiations in accordance with a given mandate.

The importance of the Delegations is big, because they have a key role in the EU’s

external assistance, especially in close cooperation with the EuropeAid. They also have

an increasing role in the conduct of the Common Foreign and Security Policy and they

provide assistance to the High Representatives, the Secretary-General of the EU council

and the Parliament, described below.21

3.2. THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL

The Council is made up by the ministers of the member states and can take nine

different configurations depending on the subject under examination. They are the

following: 1) general affairs and external relations, 2) economic and financial affairs, 3)

cooperation in the field of justice and home affairs, 4) employment, social policy, health

and consumer affairs, 5) competitiveness, 6) transport, telecommunications and energy,

21


http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/delegations/intro/role.htm (25/04/2007)

36

7) agriculture and fisheries, 8) environment and 9) education, youth and culture.22 The

Council has been especially active in the field of conflict resolution, by advancing

civilian capabilities and by focusing on diplomacy and political dialogue, through the

High Representative and the Special Representatives. The various conflict resolution

policies are below presented.

1. General Affairs and External Relations Council

This Council deals with the whole of the Union's external action, including CFSP,

European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP), Foreign Trade and Development

Cooperation.23 Part of the ESDP is various military, police and civilian operations, which

have taken place, or are still active, in the Balkans, Africa, Asia, South Caucasus and the

Middle East. The political and military structures which implement the ESDP policies are

the Political and Security Committee, the EU Military Committee, the Committee for

Civilian Aspects of Crisis Management and the EU Military Staff, all described below.

2. Secretary General of the Council / High Representative of the CFSP (SG/HR)

Appointed by the Council and receiving his orders from the foreign ministers, he is

supported by the newly established Policy Planning and Early Warning Unit. Javier

Solana is in that position since 1999 and has been a key figure in EU’s crisis management

and conflict prevention policy, due to the fact that he became involved in many cases.

22

The council of the European Union. Available at: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/showPage.asp?id=427&lang=en&mode=g (25/04/2007) 23

The council of the European Union. Available at: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/showPage.asp?id=388&lang=en (25/04/2007)

37

3. Policy Planning and Early Warning Unit (PPU)

In general, the unit has the following tasks: "monitoring and analysing

developments in areas relevant to the CFSP; providing assessments of the Union's foreign

and security policy interests and identifying areas where the CFSP could focus in future;

providing timely assessments and early warning of events or situations...including

potential political crises; producing...argued policy options papers...as a contribution to

policy formulation in the Council..."24

4. European Union Military Committee (EUMC)

The EUMC is responsible for all EU military activities. It is composed of the

Ministers of Defense of the Member States, who are regularly represented by their

permanent military representatives. It develops the overall concept for military crisis

management, provides risk assessments of potential crises, analyses the military

dimension of a crisis situation and maintains military relations with non-EU NATO

members, other states and organizations, including NATO.

5. EU Military Staff (EUMS)

The EUMS “performs early warning strategic planning and situation assessment”.

It is a General Directorate within the Council General Secretariat. It is the only

permanent integrated military structure of the European Union.

Established on 11 June 2001, the EU Military Staff receives tasks from the

EU Military Committee (which represents the Chiefs of Defence of

all the Member States).

24 Schneckener, U. (2002): “Developing and applying EU crisis management. Test case Macedonia”. P.20. Available in http://www.ecmi.de/download/working_paper_14.pdf. Accessed at 23 April 2007

38

The EUMS provides in-house military expertise for the Secretary-General/High

Representative (SG/HR). The main operational functions of EUMS are:

� early warning,

� situation assessment, and

� strategic planning.

A new body within the EUMS, with effect from January 1st, 2007, is the EU

Operations Centre, which will strength EU’s capacity for conflict management. 25

4. Committee for Civilian Aspects of Crisis Management (CIVCOM)

Established on 2000, the Civilian Aspects of Crisis Management’s priority areas are

the following: police, strengthening of the rule of law, strengthening civilian

administration and civil protection. The Committee identifies possible missions, defines

the capabilities needed and calls for contributions.26

5. Political and Security Committee (PSC)

The PSC’s main functions are “keeping track of the international situation, and

helping to define policies within the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)

including the ESDP. It prepares a coherent EU response to a crisis and exercises its

political control and strategic direction”.27

More concretely, its aim is to:

25

The council of the EU. Available at: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/cms3_fo/showPage.asp?id=1039&lang=en&mode=g (25/4/2007) 26

The council of the EU. Available at: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/cms3_fo/showPage.asp?lang=en&id=278&mode=g&name (25/4/2007) 27 The council of the EU. Available at: http://www.consilium.eu.int/cms3_fo/showPage.asp?id=27

an analysis of the european union’s conflict...

Documents